From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Timestamps in ...-autoloads.el files
Date: Sat, 21 May 2016 00:14:02 +0300
Message-ID: <877feo1lgl.fsf@gmail.com>
References: <87zize1mmq.fsf@gnu.org> <87si55h205.fsf@gmail.com>
	<87mvvde3h0.fsf@gnu.org> <87vba0mkwy.fsf@gmail.com>
	<87y4ew88km.fsf@gnu.org> <8737pomysb.fsf@gmail.com>
	<8737piyxvv.fsf@gnu.org> <87oa85pvy4.fsf@gmail.com>
	<874m9xujxm.fsf@gnu.org> <87vb2ayps5.fsf@gmail.com>
	<877fepgcny.fsf@gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45547)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <alezost@gmail.com>) id 1b3t78-0002Rn-L4
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 May 2016 18:41:55 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <alezost@gmail.com>) id 1b3rkB-0004Uw-9x
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 May 2016 17:14:06 -0400
In-Reply-To: <877fepgcny.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic
	\=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\=
	\=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Fri, 20 May 2016 14:02:41 +0200")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@gnu.org>
Cc: guix-devel <guix-devel@gnu.org>

Ludovic Court=C3=A8s (2016-05-20 15:02 +0300) wrote:

> Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com> skribis:
>
>> Ludovic Court=C3=A8s (2016-05-17 12:12 +0300) wrote:
[...]
>>> Apparently we have to use =E2=80=98--no-backup-if-mismatch=E2=80=99 to =
avoid that.
>>
>> You even found the flag, thanks!  So is it OK to apply the attached
>> patch to core-updates?
>
> The patch LGTM, but since this is a full-rebuild change, I prefer keep
> it for the next core-updates cycle.  Let=E2=80=99s try not to forget abou=
t it.
> :-)

OK, I will not forget, thanks!

--=20
Alex